On Wed, 2006-04-26 12:25:19 -0700, David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:[Variable names that are reserved in C++]> And, FWIW, it isn't even necessary to change those names. That is only> needed to compile the kernel in C++, which is not what anyone was talking> about. Supporting C++ modules, for example, would work fine even if the> kernel had variables called 'class' or 'private'. (Though things could be> done a lot more cleanly if it didn't as it would require some remapping> before and after compilation.)

There's one _practical_ thing you need to keep in mind: you'll eitherneed 'C++'-clean kernel headers (to interface low-level kernelfunctions) or a separate set of headers.

For separate headers, I see the problem of keeping them synchronizedwith the kernel. The clean-up-kernel-headers-for-userspce-consumptionguys already took that bullet once and up to now, there's no "real"result. (That's while we all know that kernel values *are* somewhatfor the userspace guys:-) I see an even smaller user-base forseparate C++ kernel headers (and thus more work per person)--and Ithink that the current in-kernel headers just won't be C++ compatible,ever[*].